Anthropological motivated usability evaluation : An exploration of IREON – international relations and area studies gateway

Jahn, Najko Anthropological motivated usability evaluation : An exploration of IREON – international relations and area studies gateway. Library Hi Tech, 2008, vol. 26, n. 4, pp. 606-621. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[img]
Preview
 PDF
2380260409.pdf
Download (394kB) | Preview

English abstract

Purpose – The objective of this paper is to evaluate the usability of the recently developed IREON – International Relations and Area Studies Gateway – with the aid of an anthropological motivated research design. Within such an approach, the work environment and subject experiences of the test subjects become a crucial part of the observation. Design/methodology/approach – The objectives are achieved by contextualisation of the digital library under examination. Furthermore, previous evaluation models of digital libraries are discussed from an anthropological point of view. As a result, a multi-method approach that is context-relative and self-reflexive is applied to assess the usability of IREON. Findings – The structural and cultural complexity of people involved in the development, operation and usage of IREON justifies a multi-method approach. Whereas information specialists and web designers tend to focus on different kind of problems, there is a high degree of common discoverability between political science students and researchers. Research limitations/implications – Because of the contingent nature of digital library usage, evaluation methods and findings have to be always reassessed. Practical implications – Anthropologically motivated usability evaluations are an inexpensive but efficient way to improve design activities. Originality/value – This paper provides librarians with basic knowledge of anthropological methods to evaluate digital library services.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Digital libraries, User studies, Best practice
Subjects: C. Users, literacy and reading. > CB. User studies.
Depositing user: Najko Jahn
Date deposited: 02 Sep 2009
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:15
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/13478

References

Anderson, T. and Choudhury, S. (2003), “A usability research agenda for digital libraries”, available at: http://dkc.jhu.edu/usability\_1.html (accessed 25 March 2008).

Andre, T.S., Hartson, R.H. and Williges, R.C. (2003), “Determining the effectiveness of the usability problem inspector: a theory-based model and tool for finding usability problems”, Human Factors, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 455-82.

Bernard, R.H. (1994), “Methods belong to all of us”, in Borofsky, R. (Ed.), Assessing Cultural Anthropology, McGraw-Hill College, New York, NY, pp. 168-77.

Bernard, R.H. (1996), “Qualitative data, quantitative analysis”, The Cultural Anthropology Methods Journal, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 9-11.

Blandford, A., Adams, A., Attfield, S., Buchanan, G., Gow, J. and Makri, S. (2008), “The PRET A Rapporter framework: evaluating digital libraries from the perspective of information work”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 4-21.

Blandford, A., Keith, S., Connell, I. and Edwards, H. (2004), “Analytical usability evaluation for digital libraries: a case study”, IEEE Computer Society & Association for Computing Machinery, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, pp. 27-36, Proceedings of the 4th ACMIEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries.

Borgman, C.L. (1999), “What are digital libraries? Competing visions”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 35, pp. 227-43.

Buttenfield, B. (1999), “Usability evaluation of digital libraries”, Science and Technology Libraries, Vol. 17 Nos 3/4, pp. 39-59.

Chowdhury, S., Landoni, M. and Gibb, F. (2006), “Usability and impact of digital libraries: a review”, Online Information Review, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 656-80.

Crabtree, A., Twidale, M.B., O’Brien, J. and Nichols, D.M. (1997), “Talking in the library: implications for the design of digital libraries”, DL ’97: Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries, ACM, New York, NY, pp. 221-8.

Craven, J. and Booth, H. (2006), “Putting awareness into practice: practical steps for conducting usability tests”, Library Review, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 179-94.

Duncker, E., Leng Theng, L. and Mohd-Nasir, N. (2000), “Cultural usability in digital libraries”, Bulletin of The American Society for Information Science, Vol. 26 No. 4, available at: www.

asis.org/Bulletin/May-00/duncker__et_al.html (accessed 25 March 2008).

Ewert, G. and Umsta¨tter, W. (1997), Lehrbuch der Bibliotheksverwaltung, Hiersemann, Stuttgart.

Flaxbart, D. (2001), “Conversations with chemists information-seeking behavior of chemistry faculty in the electronic age”, Science and Technology Libraries, Vol. 21 Nos 3/4, pp. 5-26.

Fuhr, N., Tsakonas, G., Aalberg, T., Agosti, M., Hansen, P. and Kapidakis, S. (2007), “Evaluation of digital libraries”, International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 21-38.

Geertz, C. (1973), “Thick description: toward an interpretive theory of culture”, The Interpretation of Cultures, Basic Books, Inc., New York, NY, pp. 3-30.

Goncalves, M.A., Moreira, B.L., Fox, E.A. and Watson, L.T. (2007), “What is a good digital library? A quality model for digital libraries”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 1416-37.

Hartson, R.H., Shivakumar, P. and Perez-Quinones, M.A. (2004), “Usability inspection of digital libraries: a case study”, International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 108-23.

Hertzum, M. and Jacobson, N.E. (2001), “The evaluator effect: a chilling fact about usability evaluation methods”, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 421-43.

Jeng, J. (2005), “Usability assessment of academic digital libraries: effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, and learnability”, Libri, Vol. 55, pp. 96-121.

Krause, J. (2007), “The concepts of semantic heterogeneity and ontology of the semantic web as a background of the German science portals vascoda and sowiport”, in Prasad, A.R.D. and Madalli, D.P. (Eds), International Conference on Semantic Web & Digital Libraries (ICSD 2007), pp. 13-24.

Krug, S. (2006), Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, 2nd Ed.,New Riders Press, Indianapolis, IN.

Kuruppu, P.U. (2007), “Evaluation of reference services: a review”, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 368-81.

Marty, P.F. and Twidale, M.B. (2005), “Extreme discount usability engineering”, GSLIS UIUC Technical Report, available at: www.isrl.uiuc.edu/,twidale/pubs/ExtremeDiscUETechReport.pdf (accessed 25 March 2008).

Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., Jamali, H.R. and Watkinson, A. (2006), “The information seeking behaviour of the users of digital scholarly journals”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 1345-65.

Nielsen, J. and Loranger, H. (2006), Prioritizing Web Usability, New Riders, Berkeley, CA.

Nielsen, J. and Mack, R.L. (1994), Usability Inspection Methods, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, NY.

Norberg, L.R., Vassiliadis, K., Ferguson, J. and Smith, N. (2005), “Sustainable design for multiple audiences: the usability study and iterative redesign of the documenting the American South digital library”, OCLC Systems & Services, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 285-99.

Othman, R. (2004), “An applied ethnographic method for evaluating retrieval features”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 425-32.

Seadle, M. (2007), “Rezension zu: Petra Hauke; Konrad Umlauf. Ed. (2006) Vom Wandel der Wissensorganisation im Informationszeitalter”, LIBREAS – Library Ideas, Vol. 3 Nos 1/2,

available at: www.ib.hu-berlin.de/,libreas/libreas_neu/ausgabe8/014sea.htm (accessed 25 March 2008).

Shiri, A.A. (2003), “Digital library research: current developments and trends”, Library Review, Vol. 52 No. 5, pp. 198-202.

Stenhouse, L. (1981), “Using case study in library research”, Social Science Information Studies, Vol. 1, pp. 221-30.

Tsakonas, G. and Papatheodorou, C. (2006), “Analysing and evaluating usefulness and usability in electronic information services”, Journal of Information Science, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 400-19.

Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Woolrych, A. and Cockton, G. (2001), “Why and when five test users aren’t enough”, in Blandford, A. and Vanderdonckt, J. (Eds), People and Computers – Interaction without Frontiers, Joint Proceedings of HCI 2001 and IHM 2001, Vol. 15, Springer, London, pp. 105-8.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS